About your Search

20121202
20121210
STATION
MSNBCW 11
CNNW 3
CSPAN 3
CSPAN2 2
KCSM (PBS) 1
MSNBC 1
LANGUAGE
English 25
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)
wants a balanced approach. where are the cuts? >> grover norquist, president of americans for tax reform, author of the no-tax-hike pledge, but some people ar -- wants everybody to hold the line, but some people are weakening. i things starting to soften up there? >> tom cole, republican from oklahoma, a very astute politician, was it very honestly and openly a politician before he got elected to congress, and said that we ought to take the deal and cut taxes on 98% of people, basically rid ourselves of the fact that most people other than charles c., that the republicans have become the party of billionaires' and millionaires in this debate. that is what happened in the election of 2012. that really is a continuing problem for republicans. that is what you are seeing to it is not just anti-grover norquist movement. it is a realization that they have a political problem. >> a lot of positive signs for a deal. one is that grover norquist, who is kind of a ridiculous figure, it has been exposed as that and people are walking away. businessmen are in town saying we want predictability, and
of the american people. >> that was followed by a fierce response from grover norquist, the man behind the no tax hike pledge embraced by many in the gop. >> every republican who had impure thoughts has to go back to the drawing board. they have just been told there are no real reforms in this budget. $1.6 trillion in tax increases. >> joining me is eleanor cliff and david dreker thank you for being here. so eleanor, we have timothy geithner who says there will be a deal before the end of the year but it doesn't look like anyone is willing to budge. is that your take away? >> i think there's a rhythm to these negotiations. and right now each side is staking out their optimal position. the republicans reportedly laughed at the proposal. if they can extract concessions from the president, then they can look like they have gotten something in the deal. so i think we're in the early stages of the negotiations, even though there aren't that many days left. i'm still optimistic. i think the president cannot be the one who blinks. he won the election and if we do go over the cliff or whatever we want to
about grover norquist. by the way, karen, happy belated birthday. >> thank you. >> i hear you celebrated, i heard there was a wild party in d.c. last night. thanks for the invite. >> quick note here, don't know what you're doing with your sunday, but the president is off golfing and take a listen. take a look at the lineup. the partners on the course, u.s. trade representative, former mayor of dallas, ambassador ron kirk. democratic heavyweight, pro tension gubernatorial candidate. terry mcauliffe. and none other than william jefferson clinton playing. imagine the conversation out there on the links at andrews. >>> up next, we'll talk to the former senate majority leader who recently served as u.s. special envoy for middle east peace. was the leading peace negotiator for that region, former senator george mitchell will join us live on the other side of the break. we'll spend some time with him. >>> and record rainfall up and down the west coast. a live report from one northern california town, where the river is literally rushing through it. >>> money was the single most important factor
. and opposing tax increases doesn't change that reality. there's nothing in grover norquist's pledge that stops the ageing process. so there's no way the tax receipts of the 1960s will support the demographics of america in the 2030s. anyone who says otherwise is not taking the reality seriously. joining us is a man who always takes reality seriously. chris hayes. so one thing i always think is true in our political discussions is we don't like to face up to big changes. we like to use them as evidence for whatever policies are adapting. but the ageing of the society, i don't think we have come close to thinking about what that will mean for our economy or the government or any of it it. >> the only discussion we have is we're getting older so the entitlement programs will go bankruptcy. taking the reality seriously. joining us is a man who always takes reality seriously. chris hayes. so one thing i always think is true in our political discussions is we don't like to face up to big changes. we like to use them as evidence for whatever policies are adapting. but the ageing of the society, i don
about that let's show what grover norquist had to say. he's the anti-tax pledge crusader. this is what he had to say yesterday. >> tea party two will dwarf tea party one if obama pushes us off the cliff. >> that's like say anaconda two will dwarf anaconda one. the sequel will be more intense. a poll find out last week that they found a majority of americans will blame the republicans in congress not the president for failure to make the deal. as we hear what grover says you see at any time other way. you say it will be the democrats. >> it could be. depending on what happens. if they keep posturing we can go off the fiscal cliff it won't be such a big deal i don't think that's where most democrats will end up. you they are president and a lot of people down in washington saying they don't want to go off the fiscal cliff. as far as grover norquist notices, i don't think republicans should be caving to a special interest of one, frankly. we do see some brave republicans coming out there and they should be supported because they are about finding a solution. >> i want to show this tomb th
increases doesn't change that reality. there's nothing in grover norquist's pledge that stops the ageing process. so there's no way the tax receipts of the 1960s will support the demographics of america in the 2030s. anyone who says otherwise is not taking the reality seriously. joining us is a man who always takes reality seriously. chris hayes. so one thing i always think is true in our political discussions is we don't like to face up to big changes. we like to use them as evidence for whatever policies are adapting. but the ageing of the society, i don't think we have come close to thinking about what that will mean for our economy or the government or any of it it. >> the only discussion we have is we're getting older so the entitlement programs will go bankruptcy. when you think about it, what does a mature society value and think about how you want to spend your marginal dollar. 25 maybe you want to buy an extra shot or get a video game system. >> i feel like you're making the 25-year-olds look a little trivial. >> if someone says you can spend a dollar to get an extra three month
's nothing in grover norquist's pledge that stops the aging process. if there was, i would take it. so there's no way the tax receipts of the 1960s will support the demographics of america in the 2020s or the 2030s. anyone who says otherwise is not taking the reality seriously. joining us is a man who always takes reality seriously. chris hayes. >> religiously. >> religiously. so one thing i always think is true in our political discussions is we don't like to face up to big changes. we like to use them as evidence for why whatever policies we support need to happen. but particularly the aging of this society, i don't think we've come anywhere close to thinking about what that will mean for the economy or the government or any of it it. >> the only discussion we have is we're getting older so the entitlement programs will go bankruptcy. we have to make cuts. when you think about it, what does a mature society value and how does it want to spend its marginal dollar. think as an individual, how do you want to spend it at 25 and how do you want to spend it at 75? at 25 maybe you want to buy an
a leadership position. they take an allegiance to grover norquist. give me a break. the allegiance should go to the united states of america were host: is your solution? caller: i would get rid of all of them, that's what i would do, thank you. host: will leave the bear. -- we will leave it there. caller: i have two questions. everybody keeps referring to social security as an entitlement. i paid into that, it is not an entitlement, it is mine. i have not heard any comments about all the people who pay absolutely no taxes at all. i will hang up. thank you. guest: social security qualifies as an entitlement in the sense that is not an annual appropriation. this is a technical term in washington that you get back much more than you put in and you qualify for it because of certain checklists we created wendell: was put together. in that sense, it is an entitlement, not different in medicare. host: here's a quick comment from one of our viewers -- guest: they are unwilling to pull the trigger and make the investments. you can say the problem is conference but we cannot read every business execut
to go over the cliff? >> there's clearly a chance. >>> meanwhile, grover norquist making a new prediction should lawmakers fail to reach a deal. >> understand how ugly the next four years are going to get. everything in obamacare that obama didn't want you to focus on or think about, the 90% of his trillion-dollar tax increase was pushed over till after he got himself safely re-elected. all those regulations you're now hearing about, okay, those all hit after the election. we've got four years of regulation taxes. he wants to add higher taxes to that. tea party, too, is going to dwarf tea party one if obama pushes us off the cliff. >>> another major story from the weekend, it was an emotional weekend in the nfl and in kansas city as the chiefs took the field on sunday just 24 hours after a tragedy involving a key member of their team. police say linebacker jovan belcher shot and killed his girlfriend, the mother of his infant daughter. minutes later he took his own life in the parking lot of arrowhead stadium where the chiefs play right in front of his coaches. nbc's tan trarep
and grover norquist has republicans on record i won't vote for a tax increase. are they really ending up here negotiating with themselves in a way that hurts their positions, vis-a-vis the president? >> certainly, they are, i think that the president is energized by the fact he thinks, look, i ran a lousy economy for four years, i left unemployment high, i increased the size of the debt and the deficit, i got everything i wanted, the place is a mess and look, i got reelected. so, what's so hard about me continuing to doing that and blaming it on them. obviously, i'm very good at that and that's base clr where he's going here and the republicans i think are not very good poker players, they're signaled they're relucks tennant to go over the cliff. if you're in this showdown, i is a, come on, bring it. >> paul: they will get blamed if that happens and the president is signaling that. that wouldn't be a pleasant outcome for them. you're saying they should suggest to the president we had he' be willing to do that and maybe he'll give at the end? >> yeah, i think they have to show that they are it
on the right are going to be saying to boehner, we had pledged to grover norquist no tax increase at all and here you are agreeing to what is effectively a tax increase. and i think that both sides are going to have to give a little bit of something, and that 37% may be the golden median. >> doug, let's talk about the unemployment report that came out today. it shows 7.7% unemployment. you know, i know a lot of democrats want to say, oh, it's dropping, but it seems to me for months and months and months, the unemployment numbers have just remained awful. they move a little up and down, but they're just a mess. 12 million people unemployed. it seems to me that that could cut either way. republicans could still lean on that and say, you may be winning the pr war on this thing right now, but don't forget, you've got a big problem out there that you'll need our help on. >> i think there are three important things going on. the employment report was not strong. despite the top line number going down to 7.7%. the reason it fell is that another 350,000 people gave up looking entirely and left t
the election in 1992, and which we're still living, because that gave us grover norquist, et cetera. >> let's get to grover norquist in a minute, but i do have a question. the gop plan consists of $2.2 trillion in savings over a decade. that includes raging the eligibility age for medicare from 65 to 67. and lowering cost of living increases for social security benefits. they also propose overhauling the tax code to generate $800 billion in new revenue. but without raising taxes on the wealthy. in a letter to the president, leading republicans compared their plan to one erskine bowles drew up last year. >> not even close. >> he rejected that connection and the white house, of course, is hitting the road. we'll get to that in a moment. but here's my question. i've been watching the coverage of this and reading it. and there's a lot of liberals who were like, he won, ha, ha, they're so arrogant about it, it's hard to like them. because it's just not attractive. but he did -- >> yeah, he won. >> and he is going to the american people with this. and why can't the starting point of these negotia
're in crisis. host: to attend the wednesday meetings of grover norquist? guest: no. host: why not? guest: you have to determine how you'll spend your time. that's not the best use of my time. i think that is something necessary that he does. host: first call for armstrong williams comes from fred in michigan. caller: hi. i have two questions concerning the fiscal cliff. the cash cuts that republicans -- the spending cuts on medicare. why don't we allow them to negotiate medicare and to reduce the cost of medicine? that should save you a lot of money yearly. i agree totally about the republicans and democrats spending money stupidly just before the election. both sides voted to refurbish something like 170 army tanks that the army said they'd do not need. they went and voted to repair those tanks. why are we wasting our money? democrats want to cut taxes. host: armstrong williams? guest: we haven't gotten to affordable care and medicare and medicaid. if affordable care was administered correctly and if he did not have the special interest groups and if tort reform was not included, package you
-by-day house members are saying they will blow off the grover norquist pledge. why do we have to be held to a pledge some would say? >> some. why give up something if a negotiation until you get something back? they are not getting anything back. >>gregg: the concession was a mistake? >> obviously. >> what we are missing from the republicans, that would be a positive message of what they are for. if as they did with paul ryan, they say we want to take medicare, social security, medicaid, and they do the same thing now with mcconnell and they need a game changer. >> as i said, on the debt crisis --. >> no, it is about spending cuts and the president is proposing not cuts but more spending. >> here is the point. if the republicans said, wait, we are going to start right here on this constitutional question, make the democrats in the senate and house of representatives vote, do you think mary landrieu would vote to give him total power? the republicans do not have a clue how to handle this. >> that would be smart, to call a vote right now on the president's ability to take away from congres
our oath to the constitution. others will take their oath to grover norquist. >> coom meeting ceremonies. >> grover, you know, the temple on 16th street. >> maybe the capitol grill, k street. it's unbelievable. >> carnalishment this is something i hope you can get in the debate is why we are here in the first lace that republicans put us on the path to the fiscal cliff by not doing what congress -- dozens of congresses have done, which is to extend the debt limit, not spend more money on getting into debt. >> that's to pay the interest on the debt we already 0. >> that's exact right. >> we are here right now, this republican, you know, fiscal cliff because they forced us to be here because they wouldn't do the responsible thing in 2011. >> exactly. look, we are here because the republicans did what no family may america would do, they took out the credit card. they put expenses on that credit card and decided we don't want to pay what we owe. these were their decisions. history is interesting but it's not going to get us away from this cliff. what
grover norquist refuses to declare whether decoupling would violate his group's pledge, that, too, gives a whole lot of cover to the speaker. and when more and more rank-and-file republicans come out publicly every day in favor of passing the senate bill, that, too, gives cover to the speaker. you really have to absolute cram tom cole. he was the first one on the other side to dare speak the truth about what should be done on taxes and he's been on tv almost every day making the case to his party in public. the day after congressman cole went public he was dismissed as having a minority opinion. well, that's not true anymore. his comments sparked a trend. in addition to those republicans who have spoken out publicly there are probably dozens of other tom coles in the house who just don't feel free to speak their mind but agree with him privately. just this morning in an appearance on cable television, the junior senator from oklahoma, an unquestioned conservative, came out in favor of higher tax rates on the wealthy. he said -- quote -- "personally, i know we have to raise revenue. i rea
. grover norquist said why don't we just get the c-span and watch the sausage being made. it could be too scary. >> brian: they had him out there and he defended himself yesterday. he's doing a good job exactly defining what he's going for. he's not the angry guy everyone portrade himself. mr. #1: makes a point that washington smends too much. another story that everyone is talking about. kansas city chief's player who murdered his girlfriend, shot her nine times and killed himself. brad underwood has more from kansas city. good morning, brad. >> good morning, it has been an emotional high and low in the last couple of days in kansas city. they are continuing to learn more about the events leading up with the incident with javon and his girlfriend casandra perkins and what will happen to zoe. javon's mother the raise the three month old in long island. funeral arrangements haven't been made for casandra or javon. the first thing out of the head coach's mouth. thoughts and prayers going out to both families. javon a starter of the kansas city chiefs and his girlfriend was active in the org
to spend on. host: do you agree with the grover norquist tax pledge to not raise taxes? caller: in service of the tax rates? yes, i do. i am also left scratching my head because i believe when the bush tax cuts were put into effect that many democrats oppose those as being bad for the economy. yet, and now, they are running around saying we cannot let the rates go back to the talks rates that we set up under president clinton -- the tax rates go back. what let's stick out with came out yesterday from the republicans. they want to bring in new revenue from tax reform, $800 billion being their calculations. do you agree with some who say that is increasing taxes? caller: yes and no. it depends. i would agree with that form of tax revenue increase if it went with spendingd reductions. host: that is where you see compromise? caller: we have been through this before. i have friends that frequently site back in reagan's presidency that president reagan increased taxes, but he did that as a consequence of an agreement with the democratic leadership with the democratic leadership
, the republican in the senate said he would break the grover norquist push. he didn't talk about the tax rates. as we all know, the key is the president's and democrats insistence on the rate going up from 35 to 39n't 6%. this week, he was much more specific. he's saying to republicans, hey, cut our losses now and live to fight another day. here he is. >> has a growing group of folks looking at this and realizing we don't have a lot of cards as it relates to the tax issue. we have one house, that's it. the presidency and the senate in the democrats hands. a lot of people are putting forth a theory. i think it has merit. you go in and give the president the 2% increase that he's talking about. the rate increase on the top 2%. all of a sudden, the shift goes back to entitlements. >> what corker is also saying, what he went on to say is when we hit the debt ceiling next year, in february, then republicans are going to have the leverage then. that's something the president dispu disputed. one problem, bob corker is a senator, he's not in the house of representatives. that's what we keep waiting to
on what will hopefully be a productive discussion padilla >> host: does that violate the grover norquist pledge to not raise taxes? >> guest: it's not up to me to decide what violates and what doesn't but i don't think so. i think keeping tax rates where they are is the question and you can increase revenue without increasing the tax rate partly by that and a more efficient system. it distributes investments away from the nonproductive loopholes towards things that generate economic growth and that's something that paul ryan has been a leading advocate of. so i think this is a really smart proposal by the speaker, and it was -- i was pleased to see every republican. it wasn't just his name. it was extremely significant. hopefully the white house understands that means a unity of the republican leadership at that table, and if there's unity there i assure you there is in the republican conference. >> host: here's a letter to the white house with of the signatures of the leadership team including paul ryan of the budget committee. a lot of the callers have talked about the lack of detail i
've got to get through the rocky shoals of grover norquist. >> right. >> and all those folks. >> and you have to get through the rocky shoals of nancy pelosi when you start talking entitlements. >> you see democrats who are, i think, talking very realistically about what needs to be done. on entitlements, i think the question isn't whether we have to do something about medicare, it's how we do something about medicare. >> so wouldn't that be -- and maybe it's naive of me to even bring this up -- but wouldn't that be important for them to take on what those are together and shoulder to shoulder? >> what i remember last summer when the president said to boehner essentially, let's lock arms and jump off the, you know, at that point it was a different kind of cliff, together. it's going to require both leaders. each is going to have to make sacrifices. in order to get this done. and i think that, you know, i think everybody recognizes the consequences of not getting it done. >> so how do you tell republicans that won't support a tax increase unless they believe entitlement reform's coming? h
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)